Allowed

Kamlesh Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC15 May 2019CRLR/254/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal revision to quash orders rejecting bail for a minor accused. Relying on Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000, the Court held that gravity of the offence is not a ground for bail rejection for juveniles and directed their release on personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders setting aside; release of Kamlesh Chauhan on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding evidence, adjournments, and attendance.

Kamlesh Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 254 of 2019

¶3

Revisionist :- Kamlesh Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Revisionist :- Santosh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present criminal revision has been filed to quash the judgment and order dated 18.10.2018 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Maharajganj, in Criminal Appeal No.51 of 2018 and also quash the order dated 11.09.2018 passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Maharajganj whereby the bail application of the revisionist has been rejected in Case Crime No. 378 of 2017 under sections 302, 323, 324, 34 I.P.C. PS.Purandarpur, District Maharajganj and further prayer is to release the revisionist on bail in the aforesaid case.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is minor and is in custody since 29.10.2017. He has further submitted that the co-accused Nilesh, Smt.Sushila and Rajaram Chauhan have been granted bail vide order dated 26.2.2019, 1.5.2018, 31.10.2018 passed in Criminal Misc.Bail Application No.8378/19, 41792/18, and 16073/18, copies of which have been produced by counsel for the appellant for perusal. The case of the applicant stands on the same footing.

¶8

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has already been declared juvenile.

¶9

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that it is not in dispute that the applicant is a juvenile and is entitled to the benefits of the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (here-in-after referred to as

¶10

'Juvenile Justice Act'). It has been submitted that under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act prayer for bail of a juvenile can be rejected 'if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release of the juvenile is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his that his release wound defeat the ends of justice'. It has been submitted that no such grounds are available on record to deny bail to the applicant.

¶11

This court has to see whether the opinion of the learned appellate Court as well as Juvenile Justice Board recorded in the impugned judgment and orders are in consonance with the provision of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Section 12 of the Act lays down three contingencies in which bail could be refused to juvenile. They are:-

¶12

(1) if the release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal, or

¶13

(2) expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger, or

¶14

(3) that his release would defeat the ends of justice

¶15

Gravity of the offence has not been mentioned as a ground for rejection of bail in Section 12 of the Act

¶16

It has been submitted that gravity of the offence is not relevant consideration for refusing grant of bail to the juvenile as has been held by this Court in Shiv Kumar alias Sadhu Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2010 (68) ACC 616(LB) and it has been a consistent view of various courts. It has been submitted that there exist no material to justify rejection of bail on the grounds envisaged by Section 12 of the Act.

¶17

Learned AGA has opposed prayer for bail but he could not demonstrate from the record that there existed any of the grounds on which bail application of a juvenile could be rejected keeping in view the provisions of Section 12 of the

¶18

Juvenile Justice Act.

¶19

In view of the above, the revision is allowed. The order 18.10.2018 and 11.09.2018 in the aforesaid case are hereby set aside.

¶20

Let the applicant Kamlesh Chauhan involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses;

¶21

(ii) The applicant through guardian shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law;

¶22

(iii) The applicant through guardian shall remain present before the trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

Order Date :- 15.5.2019 Rk

Kamlesh Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamlesh Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harswroop Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pappu Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jayhind Rajpoot Vs State of U.P. and Another

Govind Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajeev Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Ram Alias Satendra Ram Vs State of U.P. and Anr.